Zeeland Bridge

I like to come back to some images and reconsider them. Upon looking at the placement of the shadows on the A frame pilons below the bridge deck I now can note that they are not just at any angle. The photographer has made his image at the time when the slight angle of the shadow below the bridge deck is such that it covers the A frame pilon slightly and carries from one A frame to the next down the visible length of the bridge in a very unbroken and continuous manner, parallel to the other major lines and dark deck shape that define the gentle curve and progression of the visible bridge from near to far. The bridge becomes somewhat indistinguishable from a graphic form, the shape of which can suggest some sort of organic entity, or failing that, a continuous body of undetermined function situated between only partly distinct (smooth) clouds and water. More interesting than an easily definable and detailed bridge of lesser impact.

I hope that Kierans had his large format equipment with him during this exposure.

<<<He modestly says that if he saw this photo at an exhibition he would walk by it! I think he is being too harsh on what he has achieved, don't you?>>>

No. I think it's best when we are our own harshest critics, even as we may still enjoy a particular photo with which we have disappointments. Kieran's statement shows what's important to HIM, and that should count for quite a bit. Some photos depend much more on the technicals being as flawless as one can get them. Some photos don't demand that. I understand why this would seem like that type of photo to Kieran. It would to me as well.

Fred, you are quite missing the point. I was referring to the impact of the composition of the image itself and not the technical details of how it might stand up to a 16 x 20 or 20 x 24 print in a gallery. That was what I believe Kierans was implicitly referring to and not to the composition for which he needs not be modest in my way of thinking. It is very questionable how many images posted on Photo.Net would stand up to gallery presentation. As a darkroom printer, Kierans knows very well what constitutes print quality and most of us, including myself, who do large prints in the silver print darkroom, or via electronic means, know that. That is why Kierans was surprised this particular photo was chosen. Given that, I would prefer to talk about how the print communicates to the viewer on an aesthetic level, rather than getting hung up (given that he had already acknowledged its technical deficiencies before the selection here) whether he mastered or not technical details that might limit its magnification to a full size print.

I can certainly appreciate it as it is, although I might prefer a different crop. The graphic impact is very strong.

Even so, that graphic impact comes through high contrast. I would also like to see it without so much contrast, so that details might also be seen. They would be two different photos from the same file. They would both likely be worthy of being admired.

Congratulations, Kieran. I hope that my criticisms were not too severe. You do some very fine work.

--Lannie

Arthur, I think I got your point. I think Kieran's point is that the impact of the composition can't be separated (in his mind and heart as the photographer who created it) from the technical flaws he perceives. Compositions don't exist in vacuums aside from their presentations. I think there's nothing wrong with defending and liking a photo that the photographer himself has issues with but I think we can learn a lot about another photographer's approach, needs, and desires by considering their own self-criticism rather than trying to rationalize it.

<<<The bridge becomes somewhat indistinguishable from a graphic form>>>

It's possible that this is NOT what Kieran was after, thus his disappointment. Many critics (including Lannie above, despite his appreciation for the photo) have talked about missing detail (textural detail), which can be a significant aspect of composition. If Kieran did not characterize, visually, the kind of detail he wanted and reduced this bridge and scene to graphic forms, that could be a problem in his own eyes, despite some viewers liking that kind of more blatant and non-nuanced abstraction.

I think we are assuming a lot of what Kieran thinks (without really knowing that) and I would really welcome his reply on these issues if it is not too late in the POW exercise. I appreciate Lannie's remarks about the contrast and wanting to see more, but I think that the contrast is just fine myself. Do we really need to see details, rather than imagine them or imagine some other shape? Photography that takes us elsewhere than the obvious is good photography in my opinion.

The more I look at it, the more I like the negative space top and bottom as well. There is a certain power to this photo.

There are in fact thirds in this photo, with the central third consisting of both bridge and clouds. Perhaps that is why the dark at the top and the white at bottom might help bring a certain force to the photo. They are the remaining thirds, and they help set off the central third, the true subject of the photo.

--Lannie

Details aren't necessarily "obvious." They can add great texture and subtlety to a photo.

While what Kieran thinks is interesting and valuable, it wouldn't be determinative in this discussion. Because any photographer could think what I suggested Kieran might think and that could affect a viewer's viewing and learning. No photographer gets the final word in how his photo should be viewed.

Lannie, agreed. The photo has an ability to bring us into it, gradually and not all at once. Not bad, considering its apparent simplicity.

Hi, I live in Zierikzee (near the tower in the distance) and I have never seen such a great picture of the bridge. Thanks!

Amazing!!!!

Nothing to apologize about Kieran, this is an overwhelming image.

I was wondering though if some cropping (right above the clouds and right beneath the bridge's foundation) would yield to a better-different photo.

I don't know, just an idea for future presentations.

Keep shooting.

/photodb/photo?photo_id=17587320